USGS News: Technical Announcementhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/technical-announcement/feed
News Releases related to Technical AnnouncementenLidar Base Specification Version 1.3 Releasedhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/lidar-base-specification-version-13-released
<p>The USGS Lidar Base Specification provides a common base specification for all lidar data acquired for the 3D Elevation Program (<a href="http://nationalmap.gov/3DEP/index.html">3DEP</a>) component of <a href="http://nationalmap.gov/index.html">The National Map</a>. The primary goal of 3DEP is to systematically collect nationwide 3D elevation data in an 8-year period.</p>
<a href="/media/images/lidar-base-specification-version-13-cover"></a>
<p><a data-cke-saved-href="https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/tm11B4" href="https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/tm11B4">USGS Lidar Base Specification version 1.3</a> (Public domain.)</p>
<p>“3DEP is a national program that acquires data in cooperation with many partners, so we need to ensure that the lidar data is nationally consistent and interoperable between various collections” said Jason Stoker, Chief Scientist for the USGS 3DEP. “The USGS Lidar Base Specification provides the technical details on collection, processing, documentation, and delivery of lidar data, to make the data more useful for a broad range of applications. This latest version incorporates many lessons learned and input from Federal, State, and industry collaborators.”</p>
<p>Previous versions of the Lidar Base Specification were released in 2010, 2012, and 2014. The USGS–NGP Lidar Base Specification Version 1.0 was quickly embraced as the foundation for numerous state, county, and foreign country lidar specifications. Lidar continues to be a fast-evolving technology, and the USGS-NGP Lidar Base Specification Version 1.3 addresses some of the changes in the industry since the Lidar Base Specification Version 1.2 was written.</p>
<p>Some notable changes include dropping the requirement for raw, unclassified swath data, clarifications on how to represent coordinate reference information, changes to a few classification codes, the inclusion of a new guideline for breakline collections, and a new GIS data dictionary to provide a consistent data structure for hydrologic breaklines.</p>
<p>Lidar data have improved in accuracy and spatial resolution, geospatial accuracy standards have been revised by the American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (<a href="http://www.asprs.org/">ASPRS</a>), industry standard file formats have been expanded, additional applications for lidar have become accepted, and the need for interoperable data across collections has been realized. This revision to the Lidar Base Specification, known as Version 1.3, addresses those changes and provides continued guidance towards a nationally consistent lidar dataset.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">March 13, 2018</span>mnewell@usgs.gov62fba64e-6c6c-4ef9-93ff-e912a36ddc4fNew 3D Measurements Improve Understanding of Geomagnetic Storm Hazardshttps://www.usgs.gov/news/new-3d-measurements-improve-understanding-geomagnetic-storm-hazards
<a href="/media/images/aurora-2"></a>It is during geomagnetic storms that beautiful aurora borealis, or northern lights, are visible at high latitudes. However, geomagnetic storms can also cause risks to the power grid. Credit: Joshua Strang, U.S. Air Force
<p><a href="https://www.usgs.gov/news/preparing-nation-intense-space-weather">Space weather events</a> such as <a href="https://geomag.usgs.gov/learn/introtogeomag.php">geomagnetic storms</a> can disturb the earth’s magnetic field, interfering with electric power grids, radio communication, GPS systems, satellite operations, oil and gas drilling and air travel. Scientists use models of the earth’s structure and measurements of Earth’s magnetic field taken at <a href="https://geomag.usgs.gov/monitoring/observatories/">USGS observatories</a> to determine which sections of the electrical grid might lose power during a geomagnetic storm.</p>
<p>In a <a href="http://doi.org/10.1002/2017SW001779">new U.S. Geological Survey study</a>, scientists calculated voltages along power lines in the mid-Atlantic region of the U.S. using 3D data of the earth. These data, taken at Earth’s surface, reflect the complex structure of the earth below the measurement sites and were collected during the <a href="http://www.usarray.org/researchers/obs/magnetotelluric">National Science Foundation EarthScope USArray project</a>. The scientists found that for many locations, the voltages they calculated were significantly different from those based on previous 1D calculations, with the 3D data producing the most precise results.</p>
<p>“Using the most accurate data available to determine vulnerable areas of the power grid can help maintain life-saving communications and protect national security during severe geomagnetic storms,” said Greg Lucas, a USGS scientist and the lead author of the study. “Our study suggests that 3D data of the earth should be used whenever they are available.”</p>
<p>Electric currents from a March 1989 geomagnetic storm caused a blackout in Quebec and numerous glitches in the U.S. power grid. In past studies, scientists using simple 1D models of the earth would have found that 16 high-voltage electrical transmission lines were disturbed in the mid-Atlantic region during the storm, resulting in the blackout. However, by using realistic 3D data to calculate the 1989 scenario, the new study found that there might have actually been 62 vulnerable lines.</p>
<p>“This discrepancy between 1D- and 3D-based calculations of the 1989 storm demonstrates the importance of realistic data, rather than relying on previous 1D models, to determine the impact that a geomagnetic storm has on power grids,” Lucas said. </p>
<p><a href="http://doi.org/10.1002/2017SW001779">The new study</a> is published in the journal Space Weather.</p>
<p>For more information about the effects of geomagnetic storms, please visit the <a href="https://geomag.usgs.gov/">USGS Geomagnetism Program website</a>.</p>
<a href="/media/images/schematic-depicition"></a>This artist illustration depicts events on the sun that can change the conditions in near-Earth space. Space weather begins with an eruption such as a huge burst of light and radiation called a solar flare or a gigantic cloud of solar material called a coronal mass ejection. Credit: NASA
<span class="date-display-single">March 8, 2018</span>mlubeck@usgs.govb1e1f4c8-0935-4c2b-9af6-cc36ef4bfdc2Reservoir Sediment Can be Used as Fracking Proppanthttps://www.usgs.gov/news/new-usgs-study-investigates-suitability-reservoir-sediment-fracking-proppant
<p>Instead of requiring costly dredging to remove sediment buildup behind water reservoirs and diversions, sediment from reservoirs in the Missouri River Basin could actually be used as fracking proppant feedstock, also known as frac sand, according to a recently published <a href="https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/sir20175105">U.S. Geological Survey study</a>.</p>
<p>Sediment buildup from waterways can negatively impact infrastructure life span, public water supplies, hydroelectric power generation and recreation. Using this material as potential frac sand, which is a specialized type of sand added to fluids during hydrofracking, could defray some costs of mitigating the problematic sediment buildup.</p>
<p>“Sediments carried by the Loup River, whose headwaters are in the Sand Hills in Nebraska, are already being used as a source of proppant sand for industry,” said Ron Zelt, a USGS scientist and the lead author of the study. “Like the Loup River, parts of the Niobrara River are also in the Sand Hills.”</p>
<p>USGS scientists investigated the potential of reservoir sediments in the delta headwaters of Lewis and Clark Lake in Nebraska and South Dakota, downstream from the Niobrara River, to produce sources of proppant sands similar to those from the Loup River. They collected and analyzed 71 sediment samples at various depths from 25 locations, and found that 48 percent of the samples were the adequate size, shape and strength to be used as frac sand.</p>
<p>The scientists also analyzed particular methods that can be used to identify and assess sediments for fracking-related commercial products.</p>
<p>“Information from the new study could shift how deposited reservoir sediment is mitigated, and how recovered sediments potentially could be viable to various industries,” Zelt said.</p>
<p>For more information on USGS science in Nebraska, please visit the <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/centers/ne-water">USGS Nebraska website</a>.</p>
<p> </p>
<span class="date-display-single">February 27, 2018</span>hkoontz@usgs.gov83170b95-edea-41de-910c-236e3a99171eNot All Arsenic Tests are Created Equalhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/not-all-arsenic-tests-are-created-equal
<p>In 2014-2016, the USGS and partners sampled study wells in northeast, northwest and central Minnesota—areas that commonly have elevated <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-03/documents/arsenic_factsheet_cdc_2013.pdf">arsenic</a> concentrations in well water—and examined the effects of various water-sampling methods for each of the wells. The researchers found that arsenic levels were most reliable when they were filtered, collected from household plumbing instead of from the drill rig pump or collected several months after well construction and installation.</p>
<p>“Improving the reliability of arsenic tests can help protect the health of people who drink well water in Minnesota by ensuring that residents receive the best possible information about the quality of their water,” said Melinda Erickson, a USGS hydrologist and the lead author of the study.</p>
<p>Chronic exposure to high levels of <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/news/study-estimates-about-21-million-people-using-wells-high-arsenic">naturally occurring arsenic through drinking water</a> is a human health hazard that can cause certain cancers, skin abnormalities and other adverse health effects. Minnesota state code requires that all new potable drinking wells be tested for arsenic. However, the code does not specify how to best collect samples for testing, and test results can vary depending on which sampling methods are used.</p>
<p>Particles and fine sediments within well water samples can result in inconsistent arsenic concentration measurements. The new study found that reducing the amount of sediments in water samples used for testing can improve the precision and consistency of arsenic measurements for private wells.</p>
<p>“Establishing guidance for drillers that includes specific sampling protocols for the filtration of water samples and/or collection of samples from household plumbing would improve the reliability of information provided to well owners because those samples have less undesirable sediment,” Erickson said.</p>
<p>Public water supplies are regulated by the U.S. EPA, but maintenance, testing and treatment of private water supplies are the sole responsibility of the homeowner. The maximum arsenic level allowed for public water supplies is 10 micrograms of arsenic per liter. In Minnesota, arsenic concentrations exceed 10 micrograms of arsenic per liter in about 11 percent of newly constructed private wells, and in certain counties, more than 35 percent of tested wells exceed the benchmark. </p>
<p>The USGS partnered with the Minnesota Department of Health on <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gwat.12643/full">the new study</a>, which is published in the journal Groundwater. The research was funded by the State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund through the Minnesota Department of Health and the USGS Cooperative Matching Fund. The work was also supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program and an internship provided through the Graduate Research Internship Program.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">February 8, 2018</span>mlubeck@usgs.gov83be9dde-c30b-4f93-8477-0333968b18a0Water-Quality Monitoring Program Aids Restoration of Great Lakes https://www.usgs.gov/news/water-quality-monitoring-program-aids-restoration-great-lakes
<a href="/media/images/lake-erie-algal-bloom"></a>Landsat satellites captured this image of Lake Erie during a harmful algal bloom event. (Credit: USGS/NASA)
<p>As part of the monitoring program, USGS scientists collected samples and used state-of-the-art sensors to gather water-quality data for 30 major Great Lakes tributaries during 2011 through 2013. Using sophisticated scientific models to analyze the data, scientists were able to more accurately estimate the amounts, or loads, of sediment and nutrients entering the Great Lakes from tributaries than by using traditional techniques. The program is highlighted in a new <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S038013301730165X?via%3Dihub">USGS publication</a>.</p>
<p>“The approach we developed as part of the USGS water monitoring program provides an enhanced understanding of short-term variability and long-term changes in the quality of water from tributaries,” said Dale Robertson, a USGS scientist and the lead author of the report. “Understanding inputs from these rivers is important because they can affect the environmental health of the Great Lakes.”</p>
<p>Scientists collected and processed water-quality information from tributaries located in a wide range of land-use settings. Water-quality information included water flow; concentrations of total <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/edu/phosphorus.html">phosphorus</a>, total <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/edu/nitrogen.html">nitrogen</a> and <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/edu/sediment.html">suspended sediment</a>; and data from sensors, such as <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/edu/turbidity.html">turbidity</a>.</p>
<p>“Taken together, the water-quality and input information from these rivers provide a broader and more accurate picture of how water from tributaries influences the environmental health of the Great Lakes, which are a multi-billion dollar per year resource,” Robertson said.</p>
<p>Due to the new methodology, the annual load estimates resulting from this water-quality monitoring effort may be different from previously released estimates by the USGS and other entities, according to Jon Hortness, the USGS Great Lakes Program Coordinator. </p>
<p>The USGS Great Lakes tributary monitoring program can help evaluate the overall effects of Great Lakes Restoration Initiative management efforts.</p>
<p>The USGS monitoring program, its new scientific modeling approach and its water-quality estimates for 2011­ through 2013 are <a href="http://dx.doi.org/%2010.1016/j.jglr.2017.10.003">published in the Journal of Great Lakes Research</a>.</p>
<p>For more information about USGS water studies in the Great Lakes and Midwest, please visit the <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/centers/wisconsin-water-science-center">USGS Upper Midwest Water Science Center</a> or the <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/centers/glri">USGS Great Lakes Restoration Initiative</a> websites.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">February 7, 2018</span>mlubeck@usgs.gov7f5a5ec4-3880-4350-a3eb-b88c6508ad5eSalinity Decreased throughout Upper Colorado River Basin Over Timehttps://www.usgs.gov/news/salinity-decreased-throughout-upper-colorado-river-basin-over-time
<p>The study also shows the majority of salinity in the Upper Colorado River Basin comes from groundwater that discharges into streams, also known as baseflow. This occurs as snowmelt and precipitation infiltrate into the ground and interact with sedimentary rocks, which causes salts to dissolve and salinity to increase in groundwater.</p>
<p>Salinity has a significant impact on water users in the Colorado River Basin, affecting agricultural, municipal and industrial sectors, and causing almost $300 million per year in economic damages in the United States.</p>
<p>Findings show that as much as 89 percent of salinity in the upper Colorado River comes from baseflow. The study estimated salinity loads in baseflow at 69 stream sites throughout the basin to better understand where salinity originates and how it is transported through the watershed. The study also examined salinity trends in baseflow from 1986-2011 to learn how conditions have changed over time. USGS scientists developed models and incorporated long-term data from sites throughout the Upper Colorado River Basin to provide estimates of how much salinity moves from groundwater to streams.</p>
<p>“Understanding how salinity moves through the Colorado River basin is critical for resource managers in helping them develop effective mitigation strategies,” said Christine Rumsey, a USGS scientist and the lead author of the study.</p>
<p>Declines in baseflow salinity loads occurred in 63 percent of streams studied between 1986-2011. This decline suggests that salinity mitigation projects may be reducing loads. Other possible causes for the decreased salinity transport include climate and landscape changes. Notably, the pace and extent of decreases in baseflow salinity declined during the 2000s. The average rate of decreases during the 2000s was only half of the average rate of decreases in the 1990s.</p>
<p>“While this is a great first step toward understanding how salinity has changed over time, more studies are needed to better understand why salinity loads are declining in the basin, and why, at many sites, the rate of decline was weaker in more recent years,” said Rumsey.</p>
<p>Salinity occurs naturally in water due to the weathering and dissolution of minerals in soil and rock. The same process occurs in areas with irrigated agriculture, which produces about double the salinity yield compared to areas without irrigated agriculture. Other factors known to affect salinity loads in streams include geology, land cover, land-use practices and precipitation.</p>
<p>Funding for this study was provided by the Bureau of Reclamation <a href="https://www.usbr.gov/uc/progact/salinity/">Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program.</a> In 1974, Congress enacted the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act, which directed the Secretary of the Interior to proceed with a program to enhance and protect the quality of water available in the Colorado River for use in the U. S. and Republic of Mexico. The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program implements and manages projects to reduce salinity loads, investing millions of dollars per year in irrigation upgrades, canal projects and other mitigation strategies.</p>
<p>The new study was published in the <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hyp.11390/abstract">journal Hydrologic Processes.</a></p>
<a href="/media/images/salt-wash-san-rafael-swell-white-surface-salts"></a>Muddy Creek in the San Rafael Swell with white surface salts. Public domain.
<a href="/media/images/dry-wash-san-rafael-desert-white-surface-salts"></a>Dry wash in San Rafael Desert with white surface salts. White efflorescent salts form on the soil surface as water evaporates from the soil leaving the salt at the surface. Public domain.
<span class="date-display-single">January 25, 2018</span>jlavista@usgs.gov246aa487-4d90-4107-b800-bee611a412c2New Information on Bat Fungus Improves Detection of Deadly Disease https://www.usgs.gov/news/new-information-bat-fungus-improves-detection-deadly-disease-2
<a href="/media/images/hibernating-little-brown-bat-white-muzzle-and-spots-wings"></a>This hibernating little brown bat exhibits the white muzzle and spots on its wings that are typical of white-nose syndrome. (Photo by Greg Turner, Pennsylvania Game Commission)
<p>Findings from the new study, conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey and EcoHealth Alliance, can help scientists and managers in North America better detect and understand the Pseudogymnoascus destructans (Pd) fungus that causes white-nose syndrome, or WNS. Scientists can use the results to determine what, where and when to sample for the fungus as they survey areas for Pd. The results can also help managers assess the effectiveness of disease mitigation efforts.</p>
<p>“First discovered in New York state in 2006, white-nose syndrome has killed millions of <a href="https://archive.usgs.gov/archive/sites/www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp-ID=2743.html">agriculturally and environmentally valuable bats</a>, threatening some species with extinction,” said lead author Michelle Verant, who conducted the research while working at the USGS National Wildlife Health Center. Verant now works for the National Park Service. “Our study helps explain natural dynamics of this devastating disease, which is important for effective disease control.”</p>
<p>Hibernacula are dark and cold underground environments, such as caves and mines, in which bats hibernate. For this study, scientists investigated six hibernacula in New York, Kentucky, Tennessee and Wisconsin that represented different stages of WNS progression. They found that bats were the primary means by which Pd was introduced into hibernacula, and that the risk of spread by soil from hibernacula increased over time. They also found a higher probability of detecting Pd on the species known as little brown bats compared to other bat species using the same hibernacula.</p>
<p>Together, these findings can help scientists determine where and how to collect the most useful samples for efficient and early detection of Pd.</p>
<p>“Our results suggest that targeting little brown bats for sampling is the most effective way to detect Pd in a population,” Verant said. “It can take up to a year after Pd is found on bats for the fungus to be accurately and consistently identified in environmental samples from their hibernacula, such as cave sediment or wall surfaces.”</p>
<p>When bats can’t be sampled, however, cave soil is the next best alternative. The scientists found a higher likelihood of detecting Pd in the soil of hibernacula than on cave walls.</p>
<p>"Something else we specifically tested was if temperature differences within a cave influenced the amount of Pd,” said Dr. Kevin Olival, a coauthor from EcoHealth Alliance. “We found that temperature variation did not make a big difference, and that there are unlikely areas of a cave which are Pd-free and thus protective for bats.”</p>
<p>The USGS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provided funding for this work. The new study is published in the Journal of Applied Ecology.</p>
<p>WNS is not known to affect people, pets or livestock. For more information about WNS, please visit the <a href="https://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/disease_information/white-nose_syndrome/">USGS National Wildlife Health Center</a>, the <a href="https://www.ecohealthalliance.org/program/bat-conservation">EcoHealth Alliance</a> and the <a href="https://www.whitenosesyndrome.org/">international coordinated response to WNS</a> websites.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">January 16, 2018</span>mlubeck@usgs.gov6aa5cce6-01de-4000-b07c-3bfcadf9e831USGS and NASA Select New Landsat Science Teamhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/usgs-and-nasa-select-new-landsat-science-team
<p>The team’s primary responsibility is to conduct Landsat-based scientific research and engineering studies, develop useful data products and applications and share the results of its work with the USGS, NASA and others. Members will serve a five-year term from 2018 to 2023.</p>
<p>The new team will conduct scientific research on technical issues critical to the success of the overall Landsat mission, including topics related to data acquisition, product access and formats, new science datasets, practical data applications to be derived from an operational system and other science opportunities for new and past-generation Landsat data.</p>
<p>Members will evaluate the quality of data when Landsat 9 is launched, which is estimated for December 2020, and help ensure that Landsat 9 data can be successfully integrated into the overall Landsat record. They will also be on the ground floor of discussions for future Landsat missions.</p>
<p>In addition, the new team may be called on to assess the viability of Landsat 7 data for scientific or operational purposes as the satellite nears its nineteenth year in orbit. They will also be responsible for looking at opportunities to develop new and advanced applications of Landsat data.</p>
<p>“This oncoming team is really in a pivot-to-the-future mode, as previous team contributions led to significant advancements that give the Landsat program a stronger long-term foundation,” said Thomas Loveland, chief scientist at the USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science Center and co-chair for the Landsat Science Team.</p>
<p>Previous Landsat Science Teams helped increase the ease of use and expand the utility of Landsat data for users across the nation; greatly increased the size of the Landsat archive by transferring historical data held by international cooperators; and advanced the breadth and accuracy of applications of the 45-year Landsat record.</p>
<p> “After four decades, Landsat remains a core resource for land science, and now we have a chance to think strategically about how the program should evolve over the next decades,” said Jeff Masek, Landsat 9 project scientist with the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.</p>
<p>The 2018-2023 USGS-NASA Landsat Science Team members and their areas of study are:</p>
Dr. Martha Anderson and Dr. Feng Gao, USDA Agricultural Research Service — Characterizing crop water use, phenology and yield at field scales using multi-sensor data fusion
Mr. Noel Gorelick, Google — Driving cloud-based usage of Landsat with Google Earth Engine
Dr. Matthew Hansen, University of Maryland — Generating time-series maps that accurately reflect land change area: A strategy for global land monitoring
Dr. Sean Healey, U.S. Forest Service — Landsat science and applications in the U.S. Forest Service
Dr. Patrick Hostert, Humboldt University of Berlin — Synergies between future Landsat and European satellite missions, from land cover to land use
Dr. Justin Huntington, Desert Research Institute — Towards the development and integration of Landsat evapotranspiration ensembles and climate data for enhanced water and land management decision support
Mr. David Johnson, USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service — Leveraging analysis ready Landsat products for use in crop production estimation
Dr. Leo Lymburner, Geoscience Australia — Digital Earth Australia
Dr. Alexei Lyapustin, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center — Advanced atmospheric correction of Landsat 8/Sentinel 2 data using algorithm Multiangle Implementation of Atmospheric Correction
Dr. Nima Pahlevan, Science Systems and Applications, Inc. — Landsat-Sentinel-2 constellation for monitoring aquatic systems across the United States
Mr. Jean-Francois Pekel and Dr. Peter Strobl, European Commission Joint Research Centre — Copernicus Landsat convergence, architecture and applications
Dr. Volker Radeloff, University of Wisconsin — Landsat data for biodiversity science and conservation
Dr. David Roy, South Dakota State University — Pathfinding near real time moderate resolution land surface monitoring, looking forward to an operational Landsat 9/10 Sentinel 2A/2B era
Dr. Ted Scambos, University of Colorado — Landsat and the cryosphere: Tracking interactions between ice, snow and the earth system
Dr. Crystal Schaaf, University of Massachusetts, Boston — Global 30m snow and snow-free land surface albedo from Landsat and Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer/Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite
Dr. Eric Vermote, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center — Maintenance and refinement of the Land Surface Reflectance Code for Landsat and Sentinel 2
Dr. Curtis Woodcock, Boston University — New opportunities using the Landsat temporal domain: Monitoring ecosystem health, condition and use
Dr. Michael Wulder, Canadian Forest Service — Integrating time and space with Landsat to learn from the past, monitor the present and prepare for the future
Dr. Zhe Zhu, Texas Tech University — Toward near real-time monitoring and characterization of land surface change for the conterminous United States
<a href="/media/images/artist-concept-landsat-8"></a>Artist concept of Landsat 8. Image Credit: NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center
<span class="date-display-single">December 15, 2017</span>jkfitzpatrick@usgs.gov53b917df-4f45-4593-bbed-ba26f7842beeTaking the Bait: Majority of Prairie Dogs Are Consuming Plague Vaccinehttps://www.usgs.gov/news/taking-bait-majority-prairie-dogs-are-consuming-plague-vaccine
<a href="/media/images/sampling-prairie-dog-fur"></a>A veterinarian takes hair samples from a prairie dog that's under anesthesia before scientists release the animal back into the wild. Portions of hair from sylvatic plague-vaccinated animals turn the color of the vaccine-laiden bait under UV light. (Credit: Marisa Lubeck, USGS)
<p><a href="https://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/disease_information/sylvatic_plague/">Sylvatic plague</a> can decimate prairie dog populations, which in turn affects the recovery of endangered black-footed ferrets that depend on prairie dogs for food. Protecting wildlife from plague and reducing spread of the disease can also help <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/news/earthword-zoonotic">people and pets that are susceptible</a> to infection.</p>
<p>In a large-scale, three-year field trial, scientists with the USGS and other state and federal partners distributed the peanut butter-flavored, SPV-laden baits throughout 12 locations near active prairie dog burrows in Arizona, Colorado, Montana, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Wyoming. A harmless dye was incorporated into the baits, which, once ingested, is viewable under certain microscopes. The scientists sampled hair and whiskers from 7,820 prairie dogs for presence of the dye to determine which animals had eaten the baits. </p>
<p>“The results showed that heavier prairie dogs were more likely to eat baits than smaller animals, and for most prairie dog species, the quality and density of vegetation such as grass influenced bait consumption,” said Rachel Abbott, a USGS scientist and lead author of the study.</p>
<a href="/media/images/prairie-dog-and-spv-bait"></a>Here, a Gunnison prairie dog eats a bait laden with the sylvatic plague vaccine. (Credit: Tonie Rocke, USGS)
<p>Overall bait consumption, or uptake, ranged from 68-72 percent during the 2013-2015 sampling period, although uptake rates varied by species. The scientists also found that vegetation in the prairie dog colony and the day of baiting affected consumption for black-tailed, Gunnison’s and Utah prairie dogs. For those three species, baiting later in the season, when green vegetation is less dense, can improve the ingestion rates by smaller animals.</p>
<p>“Wildlife managers can use these findings to develop SPV-baiting strategies that maximize consumption and immunization in targeted prairie dog populations,” said Tonie Rocke, a USGS coauthor of the study.</p>
<p>Scientists with the USGS National Wildlife Health Center and the University of Wisconsin - Madison developed the SPV, which, according to a recent report, is <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/news/oral-plague-vaccine-helps-reduce-outbreaks-prairie-dog-colonies">largely successful at controlling outbreaks</a> of plague in prairie dog communities.</p>
<p>The development of a safe, effective and economical SPV is part of a <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/news/media-advisory-wildlife-partners-unite-protect-iconic-species-deadly-plague">multi-partner collaboration</a> to increase populations of endangered black-footed ferrets. The vaccine may also aid in the recovery of the Utah prairie dog or help prevent the Gunnison’s prairie dog from becoming at risk.</p>
<p>The USGS partnered with Colorado Parks and Wildlife and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the new study.</p>
<p>For more information about USGS wildlife disease research, please visit the <a href="https://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/">USGS National Wildlife Health Center website</a>.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">December 13, 2017</span>mlubeck@usgs.gov92b4a326-b64b-44b5-8f67-e4c8ed5d8497Groundwater Quality in the Midwest: The Cambrian-Ordovician Aquifer Systemhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/groundwater-quality-midwest-cambrian-ordovician-aquifer-system
<p>The Cambrian-Ordovician aquifer system ranks ninth in the nation as a source of groundwater for public supply, providing 631 million gallons per day for this use. The aquifer underlies an area with a population of about 26 million people in parts of seven states and includes the metropolitan areas of Chicago, Illinois; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota.</p>
<p>USGS scientists tested for hundreds of water-quality <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/constituents/">constituents</a> and characteristics in samples of untreated groundwater from 60 public-supply wells throughout the aquifer. Results were compared to <a href="https://www2.usgs.gov/envirohealth/geohealth/articles/2014-09-26-hsbl.html">human-health benchmarks</a>.</p>
<a href="/media/images/constituent-concentration-pie-chart-cambrian-ordovician-aquife"></a>
<p>Results show one or more inorganic constituents present at high concentrations, meaning at levels exceeding human-health benchmarks, in groundwater in about 50 percent of the study area. Manmade organic constituents, which include pesticides and <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/vocs/">volatile organic compounds</a>, were not detected at high concentrations.</p>
<p>Many inorganic constituents, including <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/trace/">trace elements</a> and radioactive constituents, occur naturally in groundwater, although concentrations can be affected by human activities. Radioactive constituents were present at high levels in groundwater in about 45 percent of the study area. Most of the radioactivity in groundwater comes from the decay of <a href="https://wwwrcamnl.wr.usgs.gov/isoig/period/">isotopes</a> of uranium and thorium that are naturally present in minerals found in aquifers. Other inorganic constituents, notably strontium, arsenic and fluoride, were detected at high levels in groundwater in about 12 percent of the study area.</p>
<p>“Nuisance” constituents—those that can affect water’s taste, color or odor—were present at high levels, meaning they exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency’s non-mandatory benchmarks, in 63 percent of the study area. Total dissolved solids, a measure of the salinity of groundwater, occurred at high levels in groundwater in 40 percent of the study area.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Groundwater provides nearly half of the nation’s drinking water. To help protect this vital resource, the USGS National Water-Quality Assessment, or NAWQA, Project of the National Water Quality Program assesses groundwater quality in aquifers that are important sources of drinking water.</p>
<p>Over the last two decades, USGS scientists have assessed water quality in untreated water from 6,600 wells in extensive regional aquifers that supply most of the groundwater pumped for the nation’s drinking water, irrigation and other uses. This comprehensive sampling, along with detailed information on geology, hydrology, geochemistry and chemical and water use, can be used to explain how and why aquifer vulnerability to contamination varies across the nation.</p>
<a href="/media/images/map-showing-summary-groundwater-quality-results"></a>
<p>Between 2013 and 2023, NAWQA will continue to assess the quality of the nation’s groundwater by sampling about 2,300 shallow wells and 1,400 deep public-supply wells for a broad range of water-quality constituents. USGS-led national- and regional-scale modeling will provide a three-dimensional perspective of the quality of the nation’s groundwater. In conjunction, the data and modeling can be used to inform management decisions. More information on USGS regional aquifer assessments can be found in <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/news/quality-nation-s-groundwater-progress-a-national-survey">a previous USGS Featured Story. </a></p>
<p>To learn more, visit these websites:<br /><a href="http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1360">USGS National Summary Circular, Quality of the Nation's Groundwater Quality, 1991-2010</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pubs/prin_aq/">Regional reports on principal aquifers of the U.S.</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/">National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Project</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/ogw">USGS Groundwater Information</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/watercensus/WaterSMART.html">WaterSMART</a></p>
<span class="date-display-single">December 7, 2017</span>jlavista@usgs.gov088424ee-f73b-4a0b-9d9b-e318ece7f6ebGroundwater Quality in the North: The Glacial Aquifer Systemhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/groundwater-quality-north-glacial-aquifer-system
<p>The Glacial aquifer system ranks first in the nation as a source of groundwater for public and domestic supply, providing 2.6 billion gallons per day for this use. The aquifer underlies an area with about 98 million people, nearly one third of the country’s population.</p>
<p>Scientists tested for hundreds of water-quality <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/constituents/">constituents</a> and characteristics in samples of untreated groundwater from 90 public-supply wells throughout the aquifer. Results were compared to <a href="https://www2.usgs.gov/envirohealth/geohealth/articles/2014-09-26-hsbl.html">human-health benchmarks</a>.</p>
<a href="/media/images/constituent-concentration-pie-chart-glacial-aquifer-system"></a>
<p>Water from 74 percent of the study area did not have a high concentration of any constituent with a human-health benchmark. Results show one or more inorganic constituents were measured in groundwater at high concentrations, meaning at levels exceeding human-health benchmarks, in about 26 percent of the study area. Manmade organic constituents, including pesticides and <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/vocs/">volatile organic compounds</a>, were not detected in groundwater at high concentrations.</p>
<p>Many inorganic constituents, including <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/trace/">trace elements</a> and <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/nutrients/">nutrients,</a> occur naturally in groundwater, although concentrations can be affected by human activities. The trace elements manganese, arsenic and strontium were detected at high levels in groundwater in about 24 percent of the study area. The nutrient nitrate, which has both natural and human-related sources, was detected at high concentrations in groundwater in about 1 percent of the study area.</p>
<p>“Nuisance” constituents—those that can affect water’s taste, color or odor—were present at high levels, meaning they exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency’s non-mandatory benchmarks, in groundwater in 65 percent of the study area. Total dissolved solids, a measure of the salinity of groundwater, occurred at high concentrations in groundwater in 28 percent of the study area.</p>
<p>Groundwater provides nearly half of the nation’s drinking water. To help protect this vital resource, the USGS National Water-Quality Assessment, or NAWQA, Project of the National Water Quality Program assesses groundwater quality in aquifers that are important sources of drinking water.</p>
<p>Over the last two decades, USGS scientists have assessed water quality in untreated water from 6,600 wells in extensive regional aquifers that supply most of the groundwater pumped for the nation’s drinking water, irrigation and other uses. This comprehensive sampling, along with detailed information on geology, hydrology, geochemistry and chemical and water use, can be used to explain how and why aquifer vulnerability to contamination varies across the nation.</p>
<a href="/media/images/map-showing-summary-groundwater-quality-results"></a>
<p>Between 2013 and 2023, NAWQA will continue to assess the quality of the nation’s groundwater by sampling about 2,300 shallow wells and 1,400 deep public-supply wells for a broad range of water-quality constituents. USGS-led national- and regional-scale modeling will provide a three-dimensional perspective of the quality of the nation’s groundwater. In conjunction, the data and modeling can be used to inform management decisions. More information on USGS regional aquifer assessments can be found in this<a href="https://www.usgs.gov/news/quality-nation-s-groundwater-progress-a-national-survey"> previous USGS Featured Story. </a></p>
<p>To learn more, visit these websites:<br /><a href="http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1360">USGS National Summary Circular, Quality of the Nation's Groundwater Quality, 1991-2010</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pubs/prin_aq/">Regional reports on principal aquifers of the U.S.</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/">National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Project</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/ogw">USGS Groundwater Information</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/watercensus/WaterSMART.html">WaterSMART</a></p>
<span class="date-display-single">December 7, 2017</span>jlavista@usgs.gov6791f51a-1719-4f84-8395-1a71972d55baGroundwater Quality in the Southwest: The Rio Grande Aquifer Systemhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/groundwater-quality-southwest-rio-grande-aquifer-system
<p>The Rio Grande aquifer system ranks 18th in the nation as a source of groundwater for public supply, providing 240 million gallons per day for this use. Urban areas within the boundaries of the aquifers include Albuquerque, New Mexico, and El Paso, Texas.</p>
<p>Scientists tested for hundreds of water-quality <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/constituents/">constituents</a> and characteristics in samples of untreated groundwater from 60 public-supply wells throughout the aquifer. Results were compared to human-health benchmarks. At least one constituent was measured at a high concentration, meaning it exceeded its human-health benchmark, in groundwater in 30 percent of the study area.</p>
<a href="/media/images/constituent-concentration-pie-chart-rio-grande-aquifer-system"></a>
<p>The <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/trace/">trace element</a> arsenic was the inorganic constituent most frequently detected in groundwater at high concentrations, and exceeded the <a href="https://www2.usgs.gov/envirohealth/geohealth/articles/2014-09-26-hsbl.html">human-health benchmark</a> in 18 percent of the study area. Trace elements fluoride, strontium and uranium were measured in groundwater at high levels in 3 percent of the study area. Radioactive constituents, including gross-alpha activity and radon, were present at high levels in groundwater in about 5 percent of the study area. Most of the radioactivity in groundwater comes from the decay of <a href="https://wwwrcamnl.wr.usgs.gov/isoig/period/">isotopes</a> of uranium and thorium that are present in minerals found in aquifers.</p>
<p>Many inorganic constituents, including trace elements and radioactive constituents, occur naturally in groundwater, although concentrations can be affected by human activities. The <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/nutrients/">nutrient</a> nitrate, which has natural and human-related sources, was detected at high concentrations in about 2 percent of the study area.</p>
<p>“Nuisance” constituents—those that can affect water’s taste, color or odor—were present at high levels, meaning they exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency’s non-mandatory benchmarks, in about 10 percent of the study area. Total dissolved solids, a measure of the salinity of groundwater, was also measured at high concentrations in groundwater in 35 percent of the study area.</p>
<p>Groundwater provides nearly 50 percent of the nation’s drinking water. To help protect this vital resource, the USGS National Water-Quality Assessment, or NAWQA, Project of the National Water Quality Program assesses groundwater quality in aquifers that are important sources of drinking water.</p>
<p>Over the last two decades, USGS scientists have assessed water quality in untreated water from 6,600 wells in extensive regional aquifers that supply most of the groundwater pumped for the nation’s drinking water, irrigation and other uses. This comprehensive sampling, along with detailed information on geology, hydrology, geochemistry and chemical and water use, can be used to explain how and why aquifer vulnerability to contamination varies across the nation.</p>
<a href="/media/images/map-showing-summary-groundwater-quality-results"></a>
<p>Between 2013 and 2023, NAWQA will continue to assess the quality of the nation’s groundwater by sampling about 2,300 shallow wells and 1,400 deep public-supply wells for a broad range of water-quality constituents. USGS-led national- and regional-scale modeling will provide a three-dimensional perspective of the quality of the nation’s groundwater. In conjunction, the data and modeling results can be used to inform management decisions. More information on USGS regional aquifer assessments can be found in <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/news/quality-nation-s-groundwater-progress-a-national-survey">a previous USGS Featured Story. </a></p>
<p>To learn more, visit these websites:<br /><a href="http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1360">USGS National Summary Circular, Quality of the Nation's Groundwater Quality, 1991-2010</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pubs/prin_aq/">Regional reports on principal aquifers of the U.S.</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/">National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Project</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/ogw">USGS Groundwater Information</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/watercensus/WaterSMART.html">WaterSMART</a></p>
<p> </p>
<span class="date-display-single">December 7, 2017</span>jlavista@usgs.gov265c909a-7a28-45fd-8709-8c27beb28305Groundwater Quality in the East: The Piedmont and Blue Ridge Crystalline-Rock Aquifers https://www.usgs.gov/news/groundwater-quality-east-piedmont-and-blue-ridge-crystalline-rock-aquifers
<p>The Piedmont and Blue Ridge <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/ogw/aquiferbasics/volcan.html">crystalline-rock aquifers</a>, together with the other rock types in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge regions, rank second in the nation as a source of groundwater for private domestic supply, providing about 360 million gallons per day for this use. The aquifer underlies an area with a population of more than 25 million. Urban areas within the boundaries of the aquifers include Atlanta, Georgia; Charlotte, North Carolina; and suburbs of Richmond, Virginia; Washington, D.C.; Baltimore, Maryland; and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.</p>
<p>Scientists tested for hundreds of water-quality <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/constituents/">constituents</a> and characteristics in samples of untreated groundwater from 60 public-supply wells throughout the aquifer. Results were compared to <a href="https://www2.usgs.gov/envirohealth/geohealth/articles/2014-09-26-hsbl.html">human-health benchmarks</a>.</p>
<a href="/media/images/constituent-concentration-pie-chart-piedmont-and-blue-ridge-aquife"></a>
<p>Results show one or more inorganic constituents were present at high concentrations, meaning at levels exceeding human health-benchmarks, in groundwater in about 33 percent of the study area. Manmade organic constituents, including pesticides and <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/vocs/">volatile organic compounds</a>, were not detected in groundwater at high concentrations.</p>
<p>Many inorganic constituents, including <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/trace/">trace elements</a> and radioactive constituents, occur naturally in groundwater, although concentrations can be affected by human activities. Radioactive constituents, including radon and gross-alpha activity, were present at high levels in groundwater in about 30 percent of the study area. Most of the radioactivity in groundwater comes from the decay of <a href="https://wwwrcamnl.wr.usgs.gov/isoig/period/">isotopes</a> of uranium and thorium that are naturally present in minerals found in aquifers. Other inorganic constituents, notably manganese, were detected at high levels in groundwater in about 5 percent of the study area.</p>
<p>“Nuisance” constituents—those that can affect water’s taste, color or odor—were present at high levels, meaning they exceeded the Environmental Protection Agency’s non-mandatory benchmarks, in groundwater in about half of the study area, mostly because of water <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/edu/ph.html">with low pH</a>. Total dissolved solids, a measure of the salinity of groundwater, was measured at high levels in groundwater in 3 percent of the study area.</p>
<p>Groundwater provides nearly 50 percent of the nation’s drinking water. To help protect this vital resource, the USGS National Water-Quality Assessment, or NAWQA, Project of the National Water Quality Program assesses groundwater quality in aquifers that are important sources of drinking water.</p>
<p>Over the last two decades, USGS scientists have assessed water quality in untreated water from 6,600 wells in extensive regional aquifers that supply most of the groundwater pumped for the nation’s drinking water, irrigation and other uses. This comprehensive sampling, along with detailed information on geology, hydrology, geochemistry and chemical and water use, can be used to explain how and why aquifer vulnerability to contamination varies across the nation.</p>
<a href="/media/images/map-showing-summary-groundwater-quality-results"></a>
<p>Between 2013 and 2023, NAWQA will continue to assess the quality of the nation’s groundwater by sampling about 2,300 shallow wells and 1,400 deep public-supply wells for a broad range of water-quality constituents. USGS-led national- and regional-scale modeling will provide a three-dimensional perspective of the quality of the nation’s groundwater. In conjunction, the data and modeling that can be used to inform management decisions. More information on USGS regional aquifer assessments can be found in this <a href="https://www.usgs.gov/news/quality-nation-s-groundwater-progress-a-national-survey">a previous USGS Featured Story. </a></p>
<p>To learn more, visit these websites:<br /><a href="http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1360">USGS National Summary Circular, Quality of the Nation's Groundwater Quality, 1991-2010</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pubs/prin_aq/">Regional reports on principal aquifers of the U.S.</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/">National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Project</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/ogw">USGS Groundwater Information</a><br /><a href="http://water.usgs.gov/watercensus/WaterSMART.html">WaterSMART</a></p>
<span class="date-display-single">December 7, 2017</span>jlavista@usgs.govd8a02533-947a-451f-91f7-c882dccd5c98Hundreds of Biological Data Available for Fountain Creek Basin, Colorado https://www.usgs.gov/news/hundreds-biological-data-available-fountain-creek-basin-colorado
<p>Macroinvertebrates are spineless organisms that can be observed without a microscope. The dataset currently contains data for 160 fish and 649 aquatic macroinvertebrate samples that were collected from Fountain Creek — Manitou Springs to Pueblo — since 2005. Samples continue to be collected annually and will provide a snapshot into the ecosystem that eventually flows into the Arkansas River. </p>
<p>“This is a large dataset collected over a long period of time that was previously unavailable in this format,” said James Bruce, a USGS scientist involved in the project.</p>
<p>The 809 samples were collected and processed following protocols from the USGS National Water-Quality Assessment project and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Aquatic Use Attainment Policy. The Fountain Creek Basin drains approximately 926 square miles of the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains in south-central Colorado. </p>
<p>Users can retrieve the data from BioData by searching for “Fountain Creek” using project criteria under the <a href="https://my.usgs.gov/confluence/display/biodata/Data+Retrieval+Overview">Organization/Program Filter</a>.</p>
<p>The USGS BioData Retrieval system provides access to aquatic bioassessment data, or biological and physical habitat data, collected by USGS scientists from stream ecosystems across the country since 1991.​ The USGS, in cooperation with Colorado Spring Utilities and Colorado Springs City Engineering, has been collecting macroinvertebrate and fish data since 2003 and invertebrate data starting in 2005.</p>
<p>Local, state and federal agencies are interested in better understanding the relations between environmental characteristics and biological communities in the Fountain Creek basin in order to aid water-resource management and guide future monitoring activities.</p>
<p>USGS provides science for a changing world. Visit <a href="http://usgs.gov">USGS.gov</a>, and follow us on Twitter <a href="http://twitter.com/USGS">@USGS</a> and our other <a href="http://usgs.gov/socialmedia">social media channels</a>.</p>
<p>Subscribe to our news releases via <a href="http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/list_server.asp">e-mail</a>, <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/UsgsNewsroom">RSS</a> or <a href="http://twitter.com/USGSNews">Twitter</a>.</p>
<p>###</p>
<p> </p>
<span class="date-display-single">December 1, 2017</span>hkoontz@usgs.gov4ebb221a-7412-45bc-9f00-95b4cb195907Significant Milestone in Improving Usability of Landsat Satellite Datahttps://www.usgs.gov/news/significant-milestone-improving-usability-landsat-satellite-data
<p>This product will help reduce the time needed to process and analyze data and imagery, a significant advantage to scientists studying landscape changes, including changes from wildfires, hurricanes, vegetation cover, drought and other events.</p>
<p>A fundamental goal for Landsat ARD is to significantly reduce the amount of data processing for scientists, who currently have to download and prepare large amounts of Landsat scene-based data for time-series investigative analysis.</p>
<p>ARD provides users with notable flexibility in how they access customized Landsat data. For example, users will have the ability to tailor requests according to specific needs in terms of geospatial regions, spectral bands and collection dates.</p>
<p>Landsat data are the world’s longest continuously acquired collection of space-based land remote sensing data. ARD products represent over 30 years of Landsat data available at the highest scientific quality ever produced.</p>
<p>This initial ARD release includes Landsat 4-8 imagery of the conterminous United States, Alaska and Hawaii. In the future, the USGS plans to add the earlier Landsat 1-5 Multispectral Scanner era imagery to the ARD product suite and eventually expand ARD to include the full global Landsat archive.</p>
<p>ARD will serve many purposes such as the foundational dataset for the recent <a href="https://eros.usgs.gov/science/lcmap">USGS Land Change Monitoring, Assessment, and Projection (LCMAP) initiative</a>. The initiative aims to characterize historical and near-real time land-cover changes across the United States.</p>
<a href="/media/images/landsat-analysis-ready-data"></a>
<p>The ARD products are based on the recently released <a href="https://landsat.usgs.gov/landsat-collections">Landsat Level-1 Collection</a> structure. Landsat Level-1 products refer to the most basic level of processing that has been applied to a scene for them to be used in applications. This collection management structure ensures access to Landsat Level-1 products as they are acquired and a consistent archive of known data quality.</p>
<p>The USGS generates ARD products from data acquired by the Landsat 4-5 Thematic Mapper, Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus and Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager and Thermal Infrared Sensor instruments. </p>
<p>Landsat ARD is created after processing Landsat Level-1 Collection scenes into Albers Equal Area Conic projection. The USGS processes these products to create top of atmosphere reflectance, brightness temperature and atmospherically corrected surface reflectance. The USGS assembles these products into “tiles” adapted from the <a href="http://globalmonitoring.sdstate.edu/projects/weld/">Web Enabled Landsat Data</a> tiling scheme. This tiling scheme ensures that each pixel in an ARD tile represents the same location on the Earth’s surface through the entire ARD time series record from 1982 to the present. </p>
<p>In addition to this higher-level spectral band processing of geophysical parameters, ARD includes several pixel-level quality assessment bands. These bands document the presence of sensor, solar, atmospheric and topographic conditions and traceability to the Landsat Level-1 input source scenes used in ARD. </p>
<p>Each ARD tile product is accompanied by comprehensive metadata that ensures full traceability to the Level-1 input source scenes as well as the versions of the algorithms and processing software used to generate them. The USGS has documented ARD product characteristics in the <a href="https://landsat.usgs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/LSDS-1873_US_Landsat_ARD_DFCB.pdf">Landsat ARD Data Format Control Book</a>.</p>
<p>ARD results from a USGS-NASA decision to make Landsat data more relevant for the next generation of information applications.</p>
<p>Users can access Landsat ARD through the <a href="https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/">EarthExplorer data portal</a>.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">November 8, 2017</span>jkfitzpatrick@usgs.gov17e7a5e6-b17e-4ee6-b190-9ed8190ba799NHD and WBD Map Services Moving to the Cloudhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/nhd-and-wbd-map-services-moving-cloud
<p>National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and Watershed Boundary Dataset (WBD) dynamic web-based map services currently served directly from USGS endpoints are migrating to <a href="https://hydro.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services">new Cloud endpoints</a> The migration will improve performance and reliability while keeping separate and independently consumable NHD and WBD services. These new Cloud endpoints also provide a more logical hierarchy for accessing <a href="https://hydro.nationalmap.gov">USGS Hydrography web-based map services</a>. This change will impact applications presently consuming the NHD and WBD layers from the previous service addresses.</p>
<p>USGS will provide a transition period through December 31, 2017. The previous endpoints from USGS servers will continue to be publicly accessible during this transition period. Users will need to use the new Cloud service endpoints to access the NHD or WBD dynamic services after the transition period ends. In addition, users consuming the services from the previous endpoints will need to update application configurations for display of the desired layers.</p>
<p>An announcement will be posted in the “What’s New” section on the <a href="https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/launch/">The National Map website</a> and information related to services on the “<a href="https://nhd.usgs.gov/data.html">Links to Data Products and Map Services</a>” page of the USGS Hydrography website will document these changes. For more information on the <a href="https://nhd.usgs.gov/NHD_High_Resolution.html">National Hydrography Dataset</a>, <a href="https://nhd.usgs.gov/wbd.html">Watershed Boundary Dataset</a>, and <a href="https://nhd.usgs.gov/NHDPlus_HR.html">NHDPlus High Resolution</a>, visit the <a href="https://nhd.usgs.gov/">USGS Hydrography</a> and <a href="https://nationalmap.gov/">The National Map</a> websites.</p>
<a href="/media/images/nhd-moving-cloud-snip"></a>Screenshot of the topographic map layer with labeled water features from the ArcGIS “My Map” web service(Public domain.)
<p>Summary of changes to National Map Hydrography service endpoints</p>
<p><a href="https://hydro.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services">New USGS Hydrography web-based map service endpoints</a>:</p>
<p>National Hydrography Dataset</p>
Function: Provides national hydrography data at 1:288,000 scale and below.
Previous Endpoint: <a href="https://services.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/nhd/MapServer">https://services.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/nhd/MapServer</a>
New Cloud Endpoint: <a href="https://hydro.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/nhd/MapServer">https://hydro.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/nhd/MapServer</a>
<p>This new NHD endpoint no longer contains a (0) National Hydrography Dataset layer.</p>
<p>All other layers options remain unchanged, other than layer ordering/numbering.</p>
<p>Reference above endpoint for full descriptions of layer ordering.</p>
<p>National Watershed Boundary Dataset</p>
Function: Provides watershed boundary data at 1:74,000,000 scale and below.
Previous Endpoint: <a href="https://services.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/wbd/MapServer">https://services.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/wbd/MapServer</a>
New Cloud Endpoint: <a href="https://hydro.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/wbd/MapServer">https://hydro.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/wbd/MapServer</a>
<p>This new WBD endpoint no longer contains a (0) Watershed Boundary Dataset layer.</p>
<p>All other layers options remain unchanged, other than layer ordering/numbering. See links above for full descriptions of layer ordering.</p>
<p>Reference above endpoint for full descriptions of layer ordering.</p>
<p>Hydrography (cached)</p>
Function: Provides a fast USGS Topo styled hydrography overlay at 1:74,000,000 to 1:9,000 scale.
Endpoint: <a href="https://basemap.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/USGSHydroCached/MapServer">https://basemap.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/USGSHydroCached/MapServer</a>
<p>This service was announced and made public March 2017 and is also available as a WMTS service.</p>
<p>No changes to endpoint.</p>
<p>For any questions, comments, or concerns regarding this update, contact Ariel Doumbouya (<a href="https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&amp;fs=1&amp;tf=1&amp;to=atdoumbouya@usgs.gov">atdoumbouya@usgs.gov</a>). Also, check out the October 2017 <a href="https://nhd.usgs.gov/newsletters/NHDNewsletter_16_10_Oct17.pdf#page=2">NHD Newsletter</a> for more information regarding impacts to specific web map applications.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">November 7, 2017</span>mnewell@usgs.govfab3277c-ddc3-4462-a827-75d5e0b81f11New USGS Study Tracks Millions of Tons of Rocks, Gravel and Silt Carried by the Sauk Riverhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/new-usgs-study-tracks-millions-tons-rocks-gravel-and-silt-carried-sauk-river
<a href="/media/images/confluence-suiattle-river-muddy-river-sauk-river"></a>The confluence of the Suiattle River (muddy river) into the Sauk River. (Credit: Chris Curran, USGS. Public domain.)
<p>The Sauk River is a federally designated Wild and Scenic River that drains a relatively undisturbed landscape along the western slope of the North Cascade Mountain Range, Washington, which includes the glaciated volcano, Glacier Peak. Naturally high sediment loads characteristic of basins draining volcanoes like Glacier Peak make the Sauk River a dominant contributor of sediment to the main stem Skagit River downstream.</p>
<p>“The Sauk River is a great place to begin these detailed investigations around western Washington because it is unaffected by levees, dams, dredging or development in general,” said Kristin Jaeger, a USGS research hydrologist and lead author of the report. “We found that sediment from the eastern flank of Glacier Peak may contribute about 50 percent of the sediment load for the entire Sauk River Basin in any given year.”</p>
<p>The study was conducted over a five-year time span and collected detailed information from three stream gages on suspended sediment carried by the river. Suspended-sediment loads on the Sauk are highly variable from year to year and appear to largely be driven by the occurrence of atmospheric rivers and other fall and early winter precipitation events. Sediment load is also influenced by basin conditions that vary from year-to- year and can be elevated if more sediment is available for transport by rivers from recent debris flows or landslides.</p>
<p>Additionally, the Sauk River serves as important spawning and rearing habitat for several salmonid species in the greater Skagit River system. Because of the importance of sediment to morphology, flow-conveyance and ecosystem condition, there is interest in understanding the magnitude and timing of suspended sediment and turbidity from the Sauk River system and its principal tributaries, the White Chuck and Suiattle Rivers, to the Skagit River.</p>
<p>The study also monitored stream water temperature at the three stream gages. Maximum summertime water temperatures rarely exceeded levels that could cause stress for salmon during the five-year study. However, summertime water temperatures were higher in years of smaller snowpack. With precipitation forecast to occur increasingly as rain instead of snow, water temperatures may also increase.</p>
<p>The report, “<a href="https://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2017/5113/sir20175113.pdf">Suspended Sediment, Turbidity, and Stream Water Temperature in the Sauk River Basin, Western Washington, Water Years 2012–16</a>” is published and available online.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">November 1, 2017</span>rmcclymont@usgs.gov20e73337-a2d9-442e-bb12-206d41145991New Database available: USGS Releases &quot;Species of Greatest Conservation Need” Listshttps://www.usgs.gov/news/new-database-available-usgs-releases-species-greatest-conservation-need-lists
<a href="/media/images/salamander-sgcn"></a>The tiger salamander (Ambystoma tigrinum) is listed as a species of conservation need for 18 states. (Daniel Wieferich, USGS)(Public domain.)
<p>The national <a href="https://www1.usgs.gov/csas/swap/">Species of Greatest Conservation Need</a> (SGCN) list is brought together using the combined power of the USGS Integrated Taxonomic Information System, the World Register of Marine Species, USGS data science, a technology testbed from the Earth Science Information Partners, and scientific expertise from states and territories. The tool was presented October 25 at the 2017 National State Wildlife Action Plan Meeting held in Pine Mountain, Georgia.</p>
<p>“By pulling this information together into a national list, we are able to see a better picture of species in need of conservation action,” said Kevin T. Gallagher, Associate Director for Core Science Systems. “This database will act as a useful tool for states, territories, and partners to inform management actions for species most in need.”</p>
<p>State Wildlife Action Plans are proactive plans that assess the health of each state’s wildlife and habitats, identify key threats, and outline the actions needed to conserve fish and wildlife over the long term. Each plan identifies those species that are of greatest conservation need and the steps needed to conserve these species and their habitats before they become even more rare and costly to restore. The plans are developed in collaboration with federal, state and private partners and with participation from the public and layout a vision for sustaining fish and wildlife for future generations. The first SWAPs were drafted in 2005 and mandated by Congress to repeat every ten years in order for states to be eligible for federal funding through the State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Program.</p>
<p>Overall, the number of species of greatest conservation need has not changed much between 2005 and 2015. Although some species have been removed from the list, others have been added, so states can monitor and address key threats proactively to help ensure the sustainability of all species for future generations.</p>
<p><a href="https://www1.usgs.gov/csas/swap/">State Wildlife Action Plan</a></p>
<a href="/media/images/wood-turtle"></a>The wood turtle (Glyptemys insculpta) is currently under review by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and is a regional concern for the northeast. A total of 16 states and the District of Columbia have this species on their species of greatest conservation need list. (Daniel Wieferich, USGS)(Public domain.)
<p> </p>
<span class="date-display-single">October 25, 2017</span>mnewell@usgs.gov25de67bb-86c6-475a-aa4b-80f9b56b99d8USGS Releases Selenium Modeling Framework for Montana and British Columbia’s Lake Koocanusahttps://www.usgs.gov/news/usgs-releases-selenium-modeling-framework-montana-and-british-columbia-s-lake-koocanusa
<p>This is thanks to a new modeling framework by the U.S. Geological Survey that lays out how to use available, site-specific data within a proven modeling approach to understand how selenium may move and build up in the Lake Koocanusa ecosystem.</p>
<p>“I’m excited for the release of this modeling framework,” said USGS scientist Karen Jenni, lead author of newly released report. “It represents another important step in our continued collaborative work to understand the risks of selenium in the reservoir, and provides the structure for using existing and future data to support regulatory decision-making. So even though we have more work to do, the framework will hopefully allow us and other agencies to target research and monitoring efforts on where they’re needed most.”</p>
<a href="/media/images/libby-dam-and-lake-koocanusa"></a>Libby Dam on the Kootenai River. Image credit: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.<br />(Public domain.)
<p>Lake Koocanusa is a 90-mile long transboundary reservoir in northwestern Montana and southeastern British Columbia, created in 1972 with the completion of Libby Dam. The basin contains critical habitat for the endangered white sturgeon, threatened bull trout, and westslope cutthroat trout, which has been identified as a species of concern by Montana and British Columbia.</p>
<p>Selenium is an essential dietary element; however, too much of it can result in toxic effects. It can be highly toxic to fish and aquatic birds when it builds up in ecosystems, resulting in animals developing deformities or failing to reproduce normally.</p>
<p>Southern British Columbia has large reserves of high-grade coal, which is shipped globally for steel making. While of high quality, the coal resides deep within mountainous terrain along the Elk River Valley, which means mining the coal can produce a lot of waste rock. Selenium leaches out of this waste rock and into the Elk River, a tributary of the Kootenai River which forms Lake Koocanusa behind Libby Dam. </p>
<p>From 1992 to 2012, the amount of selenium entering the lake each year increased fivefold, from 2,600 kg in 1992 to more than 13,000 kg in 2012. As a result, the <a href="http://deq.mt.gov/DEQAdmin/LakeKoocanusa">Montana Department of Environmental Quality</a> declared Lake Koocanusa impaired by selenium, and Teck Coal Ltd prepared, and the <a href="http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/waste-management/industrial-waste/mining-smelting/teck-area-based-management-plan">British Columbia Ministry of the Environment</a> approved, a water quality plan for the Elk Valley upstream from the lake.</p>
<a href="/media/images/map-lake-koocanusa-watershed"></a>Lake Koocanusa and the Kootenay/Kootanai River Basin. <br />(Public domain.)
<p>In 2015, the Montana DEQ and British Columbia Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change Strategy established the Lake Koocanusa Monitoring and Research Working Group to study, understand, and address current and future water-quality concerns in the Lake Koocanusa watershed and to work towards joint solutions for managing potential selenium contamination including development of site-specific criteria for the protection of uses of the Lake.</p>
<p>In part because of the differences in recently-released U.S. Environmental Protection Agency water quality criteria for selenium and British Columbia’s selenium guidelines, the Lake Koocanusa Monitoring and Research Working Group has focused its efforts on developing site-specific criteria that will be protective of the species in Lake Koocanusa.</p>
<p>“That’s where our framework comes in,” said Jenni. “The model can incorporate data collected by all of the partners, use it to estimate bioaccumulation levels in fish and, ultimately, predict future concentrations in fish based on different potential limits on the concentration of selenium in water in the lake.”</p>
<p>The modeling framework leverages existing, published USGS methods and model for measuring selenium from various sources, tracking it as it spreads through an ecosystem, and estimating how much it will build up in the food web of a given ecosystem (e.g., ecosystem-scale selenium modeling). It complements an earlier data release that documents recent USGS data collection and analysis of selenium levels in the lake.</p>
<p>A USGS report describing the model and its framework can be found <a href="https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ofr20171130">here</a>. The data release is available at the USGS ScienceBase <a href="https://doi.org/10.5066/F7ZP44C">website</a>. Read more about how USGS science helps decision-makers <a href="https://www2.usgs.gov/sdc/">here</a>.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">October 25, 2017</span>apdemas@usgs.gov83d3c50b-fd2a-4573-8bea-de652577f529Recent Changes to Dynamic Services in The National Maphttps://www.usgs.gov/news/recent-changes-dynamic-services-national-map
<p>The following changes were made throughout August and September 2017, when new services were published to replace previous content:</p>
<p><a href="https://services.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/govunits/MapServer">GovUnits</a></p>
<p>All land unit types broken out into individual layers. Rather than a single layer with "Other Reserves" that included USFS, Military, and others, each FTYPE (from GU_Reserve) has its own layer, created with definition queries. Affected layers:</p>
<p>National Park</p>
<p>National Forest</p>
<p>National Wilderness</p>
<p>Wildlife Reserve</p>
<p>National Grassland</p>
<p>National Cemetery</p>
<p>Military Reserve</p>
<p>NASA Facility</p>
<p>Metropolitan Washington Airport</p>
<p>BLM land (no labels)</p>
<p>Tennessee Valley Authority land (no labels)</p>
<p>Incorporated Place, Unincorporated Place, Minor Civil Division, Native American Area, Congressional District, County, and Large/Small-scale States remain the same.</p>
<p>Layer order changed. </p>
<p>Labels updated to new typeface. Most labels have their drop shadows or fills changed to be visible against newly designed layers, whether the PADUS style polygons or others.</p>
<p>Labels use drop shadows instead of halos.</p>
<p>Polygon fills of most national lands updated to match color scheme in <a href="https://maps.usgs.gov/padus/">PADUS viewer</a> .</p>
<p>Outlines/fills of all other features updated to be visible against new USGS Topo base map and grayscale shaded relief.</p>
<p>Visibility restrictions by scale removed from all layers except States which are still divided into large-scale and small-scale layers.</p>
<p>Currently, only States and Counties are on by default while all other layers will have to be manually turned on. States are visible at all scales; Counties are visible in beyond 1:600,000.</p>
<p><a href="https://services.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/map_indices/MapServer">Map Indices</a></p>
<p>Layer order changed.</p>
<p>Label font and halo changed.</p>
<p>Colors of 1x1 degree and 30x60 minute cells changed.</p>
<p>1x1 degree cell features are visible at all scales; 1x1 degree cell labels are visible larger than 9M in scale.</p>
<p>30x60 minute cell features are visible larger than 20M, and 30x60 minute cell labels are visible larger than 5M in scale.</p>
<p>15 minute cell features are visible larger than 4M, and 15 minute cell labels are visible larger than 2M in scale.</p>
<p>7.5 minute cell features are visible larger than 1M, and 7.5 minute cell labels are the same (visible at 577K and larger in scale).</p>
<p>3.75 minute cell features are visible larger than 500K, and 3.75 minute cell labels are the same (visible at 288K and larger in scale).</p>
<p>All layers are on by default (which is same behavior as previous service).</p>
<p><a href="https://services.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/structures/MapServer">Structures</a></p>
<p>Label layers and feature layers separated.</p>
<p>Labels/features regrouped by type, and reordered. Labels/features are created as single layers (one layer per feature class) by using definition queries.</p>
<p>Layer order changed.</p>
<p>Label font and halo changed.</p>
<p>Some symbols updated.</p>
<p>Post offices and State capitols are on by default while all other layers need to be manually turned on.</p>
<p><a href="https://services.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/geonames/MapServer">Geonames</a></p>
<p>Label layers and feature layers separated.</p>
<p>Labels/features regrouped by type, and reordered.</p>
<p>Labels/features are their own layer and can be toggled on/off, rather than being grouped into a single layer (for example, schools, airports, and buildings are separate layers, rather than grouped into a Structure layer as they used to be). Labels/features are created as single layers (one layer per feature class) by using definition queries.</p>
<p>Layer order changed.</p>
<p>Label font and halo changed.</p>
<p>Historical features are grouped by type (cultural-political, hydrographic, and physical).</p>
<p>Symbols for most features updated.</p>
<p>Communities (populated places) are on by default while all other layers need to be manually turned on.</p>
<p><a href="https://services.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/Contours/MapServer">Contours</a></p>
<p>Label font and halo changed.</p>
<p>Index contours have thicker lines than intermediate contours.</p>
<p>Large-scale, 50-foot, and 100-foot contours are regrouped by type and sub-type, and all available sub-types are included in the layer list. Layer order numbers have changed as a result.</p>
<p>Small-scale contours for the continental U.S., Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have been included, and are visible at 1:1,000,000-scale.</p>
<p>Slight changes were made to visibility-through-scale settings.</p>
<p><a href="https://services.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/transportation/MapServer">Transportation</a></p>
<p>Label font and halo changed.</p>
<p>Small-scale transportation data originally from the National Atlas has been refreshed to replace previous content shown in the service.</p>
<p>Additional road types are now included in the small-scale data layers: ferries and railroads.</p>
<p>Large-scale local roads, ferries, tunnels, 4WD trails, and U.S. Forest Service roads are now able to be shown up to 1:300,000-scale.</p>
<p>However, these layers are turned off by default, so users will have to manually turn them on to see them.</p>
<p>For additional details, go to The National Map Data <a href="https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/launch/">Download and Visualization Services </a>webpage and search under “What’s New”.</p>
<a href="/media/images/govunitsnm2"></a>A view of selected feature types in the Governmental Units dynamic service around Albuquerque, New Mexico(Public domain.)
<span class="date-display-single">October 3, 2017</span>mnewell@usgs.govc4302286-73f9-4af0-8507-dea0e9844993The National Map Legacy Viewer Retirementhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/national-map-legacy-viewer-retirement
<p>The USGS <a href="https://www2.usgs.gov/ngpo/">National Geospatial Program</a> (NGP) will be decommissioning its <a href="https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/">legacy National Map viewer application</a> on September 29 2017. This is part of a continuing effort to move towards data visualization frameworks that support the new HTML5 advances in web environments, improve mobile access, and add GIS capabilities while minimizing the government's role in maintaining custom viewer code.</p>
<a href="/media/images/legacy-national-map-viewer-september-29-2017"></a>The legacy National Map Viewer being retired on September 29, 2017.(Public domain.)
<p>The NGP technical staff recommends that users transition to using the <a href="https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer/">National Map Advanced Viewer application</a>. Users have been directed towards this new viewer application through the launch web page since April 2017.</p>
<p>The primary purpose of the new viewer is to provide our users with a means of visualizing and working with our data over the web. Note that the USGS already has a separate application <a href="https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/basic/">focused on data download</a> and that download functionality is not part of the replacement application at this time.</p>
<p>The new viewer application was built using the ArcGIS Online Web AppBuilder. Featured “Widgets” are:</p>
Base Map Gallery
Layer List
Legend
Add Data
Share
Query
Measurement
Elevation Profile
Spot Elevation
Print
Draw
Select
<p>For assistance, refer to the <a href="https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer/help/">Help documentation</a>. Additional information is found at <a href="https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced/">other visualization capabilities</a>. If there are features that you used in the legacy National Map viewer that are not yet in the new viewer, please contact <a href="mailto:tnm_help@usgs.gov">The National Map Help Desk</a> to communicate those needs to the appropriate technical representative.</p>
<a href="/media/images/national-map-advanced-viewer"></a>The new replacement <a data-cke-saved-href="https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer/" href="https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer/">National Map Advanced Viewer</a>.<br />(Public domain.)
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<span class="date-display-single">September 27, 2017</span>mnewell@usgs.gov22e996da-33d6-4a50-af4e-474eab900016Groundwater Modeling Software MODFLOW 6 Now Availablehttps://www.usgs.gov/news/groundwater-modeling-software-modflow-6-now-available
<p>MODFLOW 6, the newest version of the world’s most widely used groundwater modeling software, is now available for download from the U.S. Geological Survey.</p>
<p>Redesigned to improve user experience and accommodate future features, MODFLOW 6 introduces a model coupling framework to the program that, for more than 30 years, has been used by academics, private consultants, and government scientists to accurately, reliably, and efficiently simulate groundwater flow.</p>
<p>Originally released in 1984 and updated in 1988, 1996, 2000, and 2005, the sixth core version of MODFLOW was redesigned from the ground up to incorporate many of the new advances in groundwater modeling developed over the past decade. Many of these new advances are based on the use of more flexible grids to discretize an aquifer system or the capability to couple other hydrologic processes with groundwater flow.</p>
<p>MODFLOW 6 uses an object-oriented framework that allows new packages and models to be added to the software and allows any number of models to be tightly coupled together at the matrix level, with special emphasis placed on designing a program that can be expanded in the future.</p>
<p>The Groundwater Flow (GWF) Model is the first model to be released in the MODFLOW 6 framework. It supports regular MODFLOW grids consisting of layers, rows, and columns, and it also supports more flexible grids that may conform to irregular boundaries or have increased resolution in areas of interest. Solutions for solving groundwater flow can be formulated using a Newton-Raphson approach or the traditional approach available in previous versions. There are also methods for handling full three-dimensional anisotropy.</p>
<p>To modernize user interaction with the program, the MODFLOW 6 input structure was redesigned. Within package input files, information is divided into blocks, and informative keywords are used to label numeric data and activate options. This new input structure was designed to make it easier for users to adjust simulation options in an intuitive manner, reduce user input errors, and allow new capabilities to be added without causing problems with backward compatibility.</p>
<p>The U.S. Geological Survey is beginning to transition to the MODFLOW 6 model code for the simulation of groundwater systems. The program has been rigorously tested and reviewed, and new capabilities are under development. It is expected that this new version will keep MODFLOW as the simulation code of choice by the groundwater community.</p>
<p>The MODFLOW 6 software and user guides are available for download at <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/ogw/modflow/MODFLOW.html">https://water.usgs.gov/ogw/modflow/MODFLOW.html</a>. Questions about MODFLOW can be directed to <a href="mailto:modflow@usgs.gov">modflow@usgs.gov</a>.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">September 26, 2017</span>mdrane-maury@usgs.gov3751b9c2-2496-42a1-8723-aa5d78ad9a45Imagery Services Update to The National Maphttps://www.usgs.gov/news/imagery-services-update-national-map-0
<p>The <a href="https://www2.usgs.gov/ngpo/">National Geospatial Program</a> (NGP) is planning to complete the retirement of the <a href="https://nationalmap.gov/ortho.html">High Resolution Orthoimagery</a> (HRO) portion of imagery data and services on September 29, 2017. Access to standard HRO data products and HRO services through the National Map will be discontinued at that time.</p>
<p>HRO data generally consists of 1 meter or better resolution, leaf-off, orthorectified imagery products acquired over the nation’s major urban regions and provided through <a href="https://nationalmap.gov/">The National Map</a>.</p>
<p>The data were acquired through 2014 in collaboration with the <a href="https://www.nga.mil/Pages/Default.aspx">National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency</a> with cover routinely expanded in partnership with local, regional, and state governments. The NGP is continuing support of access to <a href="https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/aerial-photography/imagery-programs/naip-imagery/">National Agriculture Imagery Program</a> (NAIP) orthoimagery data and services, provided by the <a href="https://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome">U.S. Department of Agriculture</a>.</p>
<p>The source imagery used in the generation of the standard HRO data products and services will continue to be made available through <a href="https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/">Earth Explorer</a> by the <a href="https://remotesensing.usgs.gov/">USGS Land Remote Sensing Program</a>.</p>
<p>The sunset of HRO data and services is part of a shift in USGS priorities towards the accelerated development of the 3D Elevation Program (<a href="https://nationalmap.gov/3DEP/">3DEP</a>).</p>
<p>“The USGS anticipated that imagery data acquired through 2014 would have a useful lifecycle of three years”, said Paul Wiese, NGP Orthoimagery Theme Lead, “and we are now approaching the end of this three year period.”</p>
<p>As new imagery platforms become available and as other imagery programs evolve, the NGP will work with the data and service providers to support orthoimagery as a base reference data layer for the users of the National Map.</p>
<p>Links to data and services that will be retired:</p>
<p> <a href="https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/4f70ada6e4b058caae3f8e05">High Resolution Orthoimagery Data</a></p>
<p> <a href="https://raster.nationalmap.gov/arcgis/rest/services/Orthoimagery/USGS_EROS_Ortho_1Foot/ImageServer">High Resolution Orthoimagery Service</a></p>
<a href="/media/images/current-high-resolution-orthoimagery-coverage-map-national-map"></a>Current High Resolution Orthoimagery coverage map on The National Map.(Public domain.)
<span class="date-display-single">September 25, 2017</span>mnewell@usgs.govab62117c-ca9f-4ebf-98c4-526b83f0f189USGS EDMAP Program Call For Proposalshttps://www.usgs.gov/news/usgs-edmap-program-call-proposals
<p>WHO: Geology professors whose specialty is geologic mapping request <a href="https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2010/3088/support/fs2010-3088.pdf">EDMAP</a> funding to support upper-level undergraduate and graduate students at their colleges or universities in a one-year, mentor-guided geologic mapping project that focuses on a specific geographic area.</p>
<a href="/media/images/edmap-students-2015-0"></a>EDMAP Program supported students from William &amp; Mary University prepare to conduct field research.(Public domain.)
<p>WHAT: EDMAP is an interactive and meaningful program for university students to gain experience and knowledge in geologic mapping while contributing to national efforts to map the geology of the United States. It is a matching-funds grant program with universities and is one of the three components of the congressionally mandated <a href="https://ncgmp.usgs.gov/">National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program</a>.</p>
<p>WHEN: Proposals for fiscal year 2018 are due November 8, 2017. <a href="https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/search-grants.html?keywords=EDMAP">Apply on Grants.gov</a></p>
<p>WHERE: So far, EDMAP has benefited <a href="https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2010/3088/support/fs2010-3088.pdf">161 universities</a> and more than 1229 students from geoscience departments across the Nation.</p>
<p>WHY:</p>
Students participating in the EDMAP Program receive training and first-hand field experience in geologic mapping and thus acquire skills useful in many geoscience fields.
Every Federal dollar that is awarded is matched with university funds. EDMAP is invaluable not only because it contributes to national geologic mapping efforts but also because it helps fund academic research, thoroughly prepares students for real-world careers in the geosciences, and gives participants a competitive edge in the job market.
EDMAP geology professors and their students frequently work closely with State geological surveys and U.S. Geological Survey geologists.
Student work contributes to geologic mapping of the United States.
Surveyed participants consider the program to be a great opportunity and one that was enjoyable and highly valuable to their careers.
<p>HOW: Application Process Cooperative agreements are awarded based on a dollar-for-dollar match through an annual, competitive proposal process. Per-project funding available for graduate projects each fiscal year is $17,500; for undergraduate projects, it is $10,000. A peer-review panel consisting of university faculty, State Geologists, and USGS representatives determines which proposals will be awarded cooperative agreements. <a href="https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/search-grants.html?keywords=EDMAP">Apply on Grants.gov</a></p>
<p> </p>
<span class="date-display-single">September 19, 2017</span>mnewell@usgs.gov1b37304e-3b13-4549-9d5b-d0bdca47038bNew USGS Report Uncovers the Underground Geology Along the Rio Grandehttps://www.usgs.gov/news/new-usgs-report-uncovers-underground-geology-along-rio-grande
<p>This collaborative effort with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation provides extensive geologic information about the Rio Grande; the location where groundwater and instream flows supply water for urban, agricultural and industrial uses; and supports recreational and environmental interests.</p>
<p>“Management of surface-water and groundwater resources in the region requires knowledge of the groundwater system, which in turn requires understanding of the structure and properties of aquifers,” said Don Sweetkind, a USGS scientist and author of the new report. “This product shows the extent and characteristics of underground deposits that form the important groundwater aquifer units of the region.”</p>
<p>The <a href="https://doi.org/10.5066/F7JM27T6">digital model</a> is a new compilation of numerous surface and subsurface geologic data that are the result of decades of scientific work in the region. The three-dimensional digital model is critical for studying the groundwater basins of the region. The new report includes digital data from the study area and two animations that allow the model to be explored and visualized by non-specialists.</p>
<p>The study area includes parts of south-central New Mexico, El Paso County, Texas, and northwestern Chihuahua, Mexico. These locations surround the Rio Grande from Caballo Reservoir, New Mexico, for approximately 80 miles southeastward, south of El Paso, Texas.</p>
<p> </p>
<a href="/media/images/perspective-view-subsurface-geologic-framework-along-rio-grande"></a>Perspective view, looking from above to the west, of the study area, including satellite imagery drapedon a digital elevation model (upper image) and the three-dimensional hydrogeologic framework solidmodel (lower image), showing subsurface aquifer units and faults.(Public domain.)
<span class="date-display-single">September 14, 2017</span>hkoontz@usgs.gov38511859-cd64-44ed-a405-741d9f0591cbBorehole Geophysical Logs Now Easily Accessible through new USGS Online Map https://www.usgs.gov/news/borehole-geophysical-logs-now-easily-accessible-through-new-usgs-online-map
<a href="/media/images/usgs-scientists-prepare-collect-a-nuclear-magnetic-resonance-log"></a>USGS scientists J. Alton Anderson and Carole D. Johnson prepare to collect a Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) log at a well. (Credit: Eric A. White, USGS)
<p>This tool releases more than 7,000 digital borehole geophysical logs at over 1,700 locations to the public—many for the first time. Users like hydrogeologists, groundwater hydrologists and geologists can search and explore the online database, which primarily includes information collected by the USGS, as well some data compiled from other sources with permission.</p>
<p>“I have been test driving the new <a href="https://webapps.usgs.gov/GeoLogLocator/">GeoLog Locator</a> web application for a few days, and it will undoubtedly prove an incredibly useful tool for geologists and hydrologists seeking downhole geophysical logs for boreholes at our facility, and elsewhere,” said Jeffrey Forbes, a hydrogeologist specializing in environmental restoration at Fluor Idaho. “The map feature is very user friendly, and I’ve had no problems locating the wells and boreholes of interest. Hats off to the USGS for creating yet another powerful online tool to make geoscience information and data readily available to everyone!”</p>
<p>At the <a href="https://webapps.usgs.gov/GeoLogLocator/#!/search">map interface</a>, users can zoom and click on individual borehole locations to view and download available logs. The interface is fully searchable by state, county, USGS National Water Information System, or NWIS, site number or station name, or by using a geographic bounding area. Users can search by log criteria, such as log category (generally logging tool type), file format, minimum logging depth, or log collection date range. Logs can be downloaded in batches that result from search criteria or can be downloaded individually.</p>
<p>A wide range of <a href="https://ny.water.usgs.gov/projects/bgag/intro.text.html">borehole log types</a> are available, including acoustic, caliper, electric, electromagnetic, fluid, lithologic, nuclear, optical, well construction, or a combination or composite of these types. File formats include ASCII, DOC, IMG, LAS, PDF and original. Where possible, geophysical logs are available in Log ASCII Standard (LAS) v2.0, a format developed by the Canadian Well Logging Society. The LAS format is a widely accepted standard for storage and transmittal of log data in the geophysical and groundwater science community. Image logs typically are exported in other formats where features can be delineated. As new logs become available, they will be added to the database. </p>
<p>Borehole geophysics is the science of recording and analyzing measurements of physical properties made in wells or test holes. Borehole geophysical logging is a procedure to collect and transmit specific information about the geologic formations penetrated by a well by raising and lowering a set of probes that contain watertight instruments in the well. Borehole geophysics is used in groundwater and environmental investigations to obtain information on well construction, rock lithology and fractures, permeability and porosity, and water quality.</p>
<p> </p>
<a href="/media/images/map-locations-more-7000-borehole-geophysical-logs"></a>Map of locations where more than 7,000 borehole geophysical logs are currently available at about 1,700 sites in the GeoLog Locator web application.
<a href="/media/images/usgs-scientists-prepare-collect-a-full-waveform-sonic-log"></a>USGS scientists J. Alton Anderson and Dennis W. Risser prepare to collect a full-waveform sonic log from a 1,000-foot deep stratigraphic test hole drilled by the Pennsylvania Geological Survey at the edge of a Marcellus Shale production well pad in Lycoming County, PA.(Credit: John H. Williams, USGS)
<p> </p>
<span class="date-display-single">September 13, 2017</span>jlavista@usgs.govdd017f13-f103-422f-904e-9bb696b936e5USGS Seeks National Ground-Water Monitoring Network Proposals for 2018https://www.usgs.gov/news/usgs-seeks-national-ground-water-monitoring-network-proposals-2018
<p>The U.S. Geological Survey will award up to $2 million in cooperative agreements to support participation in the National Ground-Water Monitoring Network (NGWMN).</p>
<p>The USGS is working with the Federal Advisory Committee on Water Information’s (ACWI) Subcommittee on Ground Water (SOGW) to develop and administer the NGWMN. The NGWMN is designed as a cooperative groundwater data collection, management, and reporting system that will be based on data from selected wells in existing federal, state, tribal, and local groundwater monitoring networks. The network is envisioned as a long-term collaborative partnership among federal and non-federal data providers that will help address present and future groundwater management questions facing the nation. The NGWMN will provide the data needed to determine regional and national trends in groundwater levels and groundwater quality, and facilitate the evaluation of transboundary groundwater resources.</p>
<p>Cooperative agreements will provide support for both new and existing data providers in the NGWMN. The USGS will fund new data providers to select and classify sites within existing monitoring programs, to set up web services that will link the data to the<a href="http://cida.usgs.gov/ngwmn/"> NGWMN portal</a>, and to produce a report describing this process. Existing data providers will receive funds to maintain web services and keep site information current. Data providers may also receive funding to collect data to improve site information, to maintain wells, and to drill new or replacement network wells. Information about the cooperative agreements is available on the <a href="http://cida.usgs.gov/ngwmn/cooperativeagreements.jsp">NGWMN cooperative agreements</a> page. The maximum allowable funds for any data provider agency have been increased to $150,000 per year.</p>
<p>Interested agencies may <a href="https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=296993">apply online at grants.gov</a> under funding opportunity number <a href="https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=296993">G17AS00070</a>. Applications will be accepted from September 1, 2017 through November, 30, 2017. </p>
<p>Two webinars are scheduled to review the application package and answer any questions about the opportunity. These are scheduled for September 13 at 2 p.m. Eastern and October 19 at 1 p.m. Eastern. A third webinar near the end of the application period has been scheduled to answer any last minute questions. This final webinar will be held on, November 27 at 2 p.m. Eastern. Registration for the webinars is required. After your registration is accepted, you will receive meeting information. You may register for the webinars at:</p>
<p><a href="https://usgs.webex.com/usgs/j.php?RGID=ra4469734b79fcb058c137a2bc4721b24">September 13</a>: Informational Webinar</p>
<p><a href="https://usgs.webex.com/usgs/j.php?RGID=r01061b6800f4ec42ddb677bf0b39a8bc">October 19</a>: Informational Webinar</p>
<p><a href="https://usgs.webex.com/usgs/j.php?RGID=r8a340503cf6f5ae942d580cc750b4d84">November 27</a>: Questions and Answers</p>
<p>Since the program began in 2015, 30 agencies have either completed the process of becoming a data provider to the NGWMN, have an ongoing project to become a data or have a project to enhance NGWMN sites. Once an agency is providing data to the NGWMN, they can receive support to maintain the web services connections to the NGWMN provider data portal. Agencies are also working on projects to enhance the NGWMN by updating information at network sites, performing well maintenance activities at network sites, or drilling wells for the network. Descriptions of projects that were funded by the NGWMN to support data providers are available on the cooperative agreements page for <a href="https://cida.usgs.gov/ngwmn/doc/NGWMN_FY16_ProjectSummary.pdf">2016</a> and <a href="https://cida.usgs.gov/ngwmn/doc/NGWMN_FY17_ProjectSummary.pdf">2017</a>.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">September 8, 2017</span>mdrane-maury@usgs.gov9f906eea-1179-4066-a6a4-5f1714e8acd8Groundwater Pumping, Precipitation Can Affect Lake Levels in Twin Cities https://www.usgs.gov/news/groundwater-pumping-precipitation-can-affect-lake-levels-twin-cities
<a href="/media/images/white-bear-lake-thumbnail"></a>Low water levels in White Bear Lake, Minnesota.(Credit: Perry Jones, USGS. Public domain.)
<p>Scientists with the USGS and partners studied groundwater and lake-water exchanges in White Bear Lake, Big Marine Lake, Lake Elmo and Snail Lake during 2003 through 2013, a period of increasing urbanization and declining water levels for some lakes in northeast Twin Cities metropolitan area. They found that long-term declines in lake-water levels can be caused by increasing groundwater withdrawals or decreases in precipitation, and that increases in groundwater withdrawals during dry periods exacerbate water-level declines.</p>
<p>“Our study helps explain changes in water levels in several lakes in the northeast metropolitan area that were recently below normal, such as White Bear Lake,” said Perry Jones, a USGS scientist and lead author of the report. “Results from the study also allow managers to assess the long-term effects of groundwater withdrawals on lake water levels, especially during drought.”</p>
<p><a href="https://www.usgs.gov/news/water-level-changes-northeast-twin-cities-lakes-vary-landscape-setting">Previous USGS studies</a> showed, and the new study confirms, that lake water seeps into underlying aquifers in the northeast metro area. For the new study, the scientists developed a groundwater-flow model to examine how significantly this seepage affects long-term water levels in the four lakes.</p>
<p>The model showed that closed-basin lakes, which are lakes not connected to other lakes and streams such as White Bear Lake, Big Marine Lake and Snail Lake, might be more vulnerable to changes in precipitation and groundwater withdrawals. Specific findings include:</p>
The effect of groundwater withdrawals on closed-basin lakes depended on how <a href="https://water.usgs.gov/edu/dictionary.html#P">permeable</a> sediments are near and under the lakes, the number of wells and pumping rates near the lakes and the wells’ depths as compared to lake depths; and
A 30 percent increase over current groundwater withdrawals would affect Snail Lake and White Bear Lake water levels more than Big Marine Lake levels, because current groundwater withdrawals near Big Marine Lake are relatively low.
<p>The study also showed that evaporation from lake surfaces and flow of lake water to underlying aquifers are the largest losses of water from the four lakes. According to the model:</p>
Evaporation and lake-water flow to underlying aquifers accounted for 97 to 100 percent of water losses in White Bear, Big Marine and Snail lakes;
These factors accounted for 65 percent of lake-water losses for Lake Elmo;
White Bear Lake and Lake Elmo, the deeper lakes, lost more water to underlying aquifers than to evaporation, whereas Big Marine Lake, a large lake, lost more water to evaporation; and
Snail Lake is a small, shallow lake that lost more water to underlying aquifers than to evaporation.
<p>“Based on our findings, many Twin Cities lakes should be considered water sources to aquifers, as well as to numerous wells withdrawing water from the aquifers,” Jones said.</p>
<p>The USGS partnered with the <a href="https://metrocouncil.org/">Metropolitan Council</a> and the <a href="http://www.health.state.mn.us/">Minnesota Department of Health</a> on the new<a href="https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/sir20165139"> </a>study, which was directed by the Minnesota Legislature.</p>
<p>For more information about water research in Minnesota, please visit the <a href="http://mn.water.usgs.gov/">USGS Minnesota Water Science Center website</a>.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">September 6, 2017</span>mlubeck@usgs.govb8d1da9a-5af7-4663-aa26-5daf43c54a7c3DEP Data Acquisition Opportunity - FY17/18 Broad Agency Announcementhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/3dep-data-acquisition-opportunity-fy1718-broad-agency-announcement
<p>On August 16, 2017, the USGS issued the FY17/FY18 Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) for 3D Elevation Program (<a href="http://nationalmap.gov/3DEP/">3DEP</a>). The BAA provides detailed information on how to partner with the USGS and other Federal agencies to acquire high-quality 3D Elevation data. Information and contacts are now available at <a href="https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&amp;mode=form&amp;id=ad1b567dec828feb3b05651fe29db766&amp;tab=core&amp;_cview=0">Fed</a><a href="https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&amp;mode=form&amp;id=ad1b567dec828feb3b05651fe29db766&amp;tab=core&amp;_cview=0"> Biz Opps</a> (Reference Number:G17PS00746) and <a href="http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/search-grants.html?keywords=G17AS00116">Grants.gov</a> (Funding Opportunity Number: G17AS00116).</p>
<p>Offerors may contribute funds toward a USGS lidar data acquisition activity via the <a href="http://geodatacontracts.er.usgs.gov/gpsc_information_sheet.html">Geospatial Products and Services Contracts</a> or they may request 3DEP funds toward a lidar data acquisition activity where the requesting partner is the acquiring authority. Federal agencies, state and local governments, tribes, academic institutions and the private sector are eligible to submit proposals. Proposals are due by 5:00PM ET, October 20, 2017</p>
<p>National public webinars to provide instructions on preparing BAA submissions were conducted on August 10 and August 17. These webinars were recorded, so those unable to attend can listen to the instructions at their convenience. Links to the recording will be posted on the <a href="https://cms.geoplatform.gov/elevation/3DEP/PublicMeetings">3DEP Geospatial Platform Sharing Site</a>. Questions on the BAA can be submitted to <a href="mailto:gs_baa@usgs.gov">gs_baa@usgs.gov</a> for resolution.</p>
<p>About the BAA and 3DEP</p>
<p>The BAA is a public process to develop partnerships for the collection of lidar and derived elevation data for 3DEP.</p>
<p>The primary goal of 3DEP is to systematically collect nationwide lidar coverage (ifsar in Alaska) over an 8-year period to provide more than $690 million annually in new benefits to government entities, the private sector and citizens. 3DEP presents a unique opportunity for collaboration between all levels of government to leverage the services and expertise of private sector mapping firms that acquire the data, and to create jobs now and in the future.</p>
<p>More information about 3DEP including updates on current and future 3DEP partnership opportunities is <a href="http://nationalmap.gov/3DEP/">available online</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://nationalmap.gov/3DEP/PreviousBAAs.html">P</a><a href="https://nationalmap.gov/3DEP/PreviousBAAs.html">revious BAA project awards</a>.</p>
<a href="/media/images/baafy17-aug-22-2017"></a>Status map of Fiscal Year 2017 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) quality data, as of August 2017. The Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) seeks submission of proposals to continue to expand the extent of lidar data that meet 3DEP specifications.(Public domain.)
<span class="date-display-single">August 22, 2017</span>mnewell@usgs.govf6594f5c-1532-4b7f-ad59-72e5da165654Collaboration in a Disasterhttps://www.usgs.gov/news/collaboration-a-disaster
<p>In August of 2016, Louisiana, as well as some nearby states, was hit with a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Louisiana_floods">historic rainfall event</a>. As a result, approximately 22 of the state’s southern parishes along the Mississippi River system were blanketed with more than seven trillion gallons of rain in a short period of time. This was three times as much rain as the historic Hurricane Katrina flooding. A state of emergency was declared and Federal aid was directed to the affected areas.</p>
<a href="/media/images/fema-support-denham-springs"></a>Nearly submerged houses in the Denham Springs, Louisiana area during the August 2016 flooding. Approximately 90% of the homes in that area had taken on water.(Public domain.)
<p>Many homeowners in the hardest hit areas did not have home insurance, and as part of their disaster relief effort, the <a href="https://www.fema.gov/">Federal Emergency Management Agency</a> (FEMA) used parcel and structure data to determine where the flooded residences were and how much financial assistance could be provided to homeowners.</p>
<p>However, in six of the 22 disaster-declared parishes, no data existed. To get topographic data, FEMA turned to the USGS and asked for help providing any relevant data.</p>
<p>Relying on the previous successes of crowdsourced data with <a href="https://nationalmap.gov/TheNationalMapCorps/">The National Map Corps</a> program, the USGS invited experienced TNM Corps “editors” to use pre-flood imagery to identify all buildings in the six parishes, distinguishing between and residences and other building types. These experienced volunteer cartographers went quickly to work using available data and editing platforms.</p>
<p>In less than one month very dedicated work, more than 67,000 structure points were collected and identified. Not only was this data used to help FEMA, but it can be turned into a database that can be available to the parish government for their own uses and can serve as a framework for future disaster assistance.</p>
<p>This collaboration illustrates the quick response that the USGS was able to provide in an emergency. It also demonstrates the effectiveness and efficiency of crowdsourced volunteer data collection programs, like TNM Corps, in a time-sensitive task.</p>
<p>To graphically illustrate this complex experiment, the USGS has released a <a href="https://ngtoc.usgs.gov/geonarrative/index.html">Story Map</a> of the project’s background and success.</p>
<span class="date-display-single">August 16, 2017</span>mnewell@usgs.gove0089c45-a3a5-4613-b333-2ce0511b5615